The Bar-Lev Line Holds, 1973

MacCaulay

Banned
From The Yom Kippur War, by Simon Dunstan:

An opposed crossing of a major waterway remains one of the most difficult military options of all. In October 1973, the sand ramparts of the Bar-Lev Line comprised over 1.5 billion cubic metres of sand and rubble. They were quite impervious to conventional explosives and engineer earth-moving equipment would have taken days to create any passages through them. Several foreign observers believed the ramparts could only be breached by tactical nuclear weapons, but a group of Egyptian engineers thought differently.
Having worked on the construction of the Aswan High Dam, they had found that high pressure water hoses could move large quantities of soil and sand. Large numbers of generator-driven high-pressure pumps were acquired for the 'Cairo Fire Department' from Britain and West Germany. The first trials of the this method were conducted in September 1969 and proved a capacity to shift 500 cubic metres per hour. Once the technique was perfected, it was found a gap could be created in three to four hours.
It was this method that was used to break through the giant sand berms on 6 October, creating the gaps through which the Egyptian troops poured. The bottom of the gap was then levelled by bulldozers and lined with steel matting to allow the passage of tanks and other vehicles.
As the engineers breached the ramparts, Egyptian artillery bombarded the Israeli strongpoints along the Bar-Lev Line to prevent the defenders from observing or interfering with the crossing. At the same time Mi-8 helicopters transported Egyptian Al Saaqa Commandos behind Israeli lines to disrupt the movement of reinforcements to the Canal.

So...the POD here is simple: at some point in the early 70s West Germany and Britain, for whatever reason, decide to not sell these high pressure water pumping systems to Egypt, thus depriving them of their ace in the hole for puncturing the Bar-Lev Line, and breaking into the Sinai in the Yom Kippur War.

Thoughts?
 

wormyguy

Banned
So...the POD here is simple: at some point in the early 70s West Germany and Britain, for whatever reason, decide to not sell these high pressure water pumping systems to Egypt, thus depriving them of their ace in the hole for puncturing the Bar-Lev Line, and breaking into the Sinai in the Yom Kippur War.

Thoughts?
Well, nobody would have thought before then that such things would actually have a military application. They probably could have gotten similar pumps from France, or the US, or the Soviets,* or Yugoslavia,* or China.*

*The only reason they wouldn't have ordered them from these guys is because large orders for heavy equipment from Communist countries by default set off alarm bells.
 
Given that the IDF itself assumed the Egyptians could breach the Bar Lev line, little more than a trip wire with a reinforced battalion as the entire garrison at full strength, in 24-48 hours, it's impossible to imagine the line holding. Especially since the IDF estimates assumed the garrison would be successfully reinforced by an oversized Israeli division with extra tanks.

It was a brilliant display by the Egyptian military, part of a larger successful and well-organized operational plan which didn't end in a clear victory over Israel in the Sinai only because the assumption that the Syrian military would be at least marginally competent proved false.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
Well, nobody would have thought before then that such things would actually have a military application. They probably could have gotten similar pumps from France, or the US, or the Soviets,* or Yugoslavia,* or China.*

*The only reason they wouldn't have ordered them from these guys is because large orders for heavy equipment from Communist countries by default set off alarm bells.

Well, okay. Then, they order some pumps from Yugoslavia, and they come from the Yugo plant made out of plastic and corroded. Then they have to go with the regular "get in the boat and row to the big sand trap" plan, which didn't work in the War of Attrition and probably wouldn't work in 1973.

I mean...I personally think the Egyptians were a (fairly distant) second to the Jordanians in terms of quality. But I don't think they could've breached the Bar-Lev Line without this ace in the hole.
 
If it holds, then the Israelis can focus attention on the Golan, where only a single armored platoon (and one 1LT in particular whose name escapes me) prevented Assad's T-62s from rolling down the road to Jerusalem IOTL.
 
Actually the Syrian display in the Golan in 1973 was a disaster. The one thing the Syrians needed to do was to push the Israelis back past BOTH bridges leading into the Golan, they suffered catastrophic losses to just miss taking one of the two and never came close to the other.

Syria proved incapable of defeating an Israeli brigade at full strength or even gaining much ground from such a unit while Egypt successfully smashed a reinforced division, the only one Israel kept at full strength in time of peace back then.
 
Well, okay. Then, they order some pumps from Yugoslavia, and they come from the Yugo plant made out of plastic and corroded. Then they have to go with the regular "get in the boat and row to the big sand trap" plan, which didn't work in the War of Attrition and probably wouldn't work in 1973.

I mean...I personally think the Egyptians were a (fairly distant) second to the Jordanians in terms of quality. But I don't think they could've breached the Bar-Lev Line without this ace in the hole.

Eh, the Bar-Lev line, for all the hype surrounding it, wouldn't hold against a determined assault without significant reinforcement. If the Israelis are prepared to oppose the crossing in force (armor in position to counterattack), then things get more dicey, but the fixed forces along the canal will have a hard time stopping the egyptians even without pumps. The crossing will be less stunning, and slower, but the canal can still be crossed, and OTL demonstrated that the egyptians could defeat the Israelis in the field, given the right circumstances (first and foremost, the IAF being neutered by Egyptian SAMs).

If it holds, then the Israelis can focus attention on the Golan, where only a single armored platoon (and one 1LT in particular whose name escapes me) prevented Assad's T-62s from rolling down the road to Jerusalem IOTL.

Lieutenant Zvika Greengold.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
Eh, the Bar-Lev line, for all the hype surrounding it, wouldn't hold against a determined assault without significant reinforcement. If the Israelis are prepared to oppose the crossing in force (armor in position to counterattack), then things get more dicey, but the fixed forces along the canal will have a hard time stopping the egyptians even without pumps. The crossing will be less stunning, and slower, but the canal can still be crossed, and OTL demonstrated that the egyptians could defeat the Israelis in the field, given the right circumstances (first and foremost, the IAF being neutered by Egyptian SAMs).

Was an active defense using Israeli armour in the rear a better option? Sure. It's what they were good at.

But the War of Attrition showed that the Egyptians couldn't break the defenses if for no other reason than because the terrain was just too tilted towards the defenders. Heck: Egyptian commandos managed to stop the other Israeli defensive measure of pumping oil into the Canal and setting it on fire.
The Battle Days on the Golan showed the Syrians had some shot at going up against the brigades stationed there, if only because of their increasing use of ATGMs. But on the Suez, it was Egyptian inventiveness that got them across the canal.
 
Top